Legal Opinion

Hammond v. Young

Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas

Decided December 14, 1953No. 106581PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By McBride, j.

This case was submitted on a statement of facts pursuant to §2315.24 R. C., such additional facts as the court indicates herein are judicially recognized, the arguments and briefs.

The only pleading, designated as a submission of agreed case, reads as follows:

“1. Howard L. Hammond is a taxpayer, residing in the City of Dayton, Ohio.
“2. Howard C. Young, Fred L. Van Allen, Albert A. Horstman and Pierce Wood are the duly appointed, qualified and acting members of the Montgomery County Board of Elections.
“3. Louis W. Lohrey, Howard R. Malone, Merle P. Smith, John C. Csipkar…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Comstock v. StewartNebraska Supreme Court · 1897
  2. State ex rel. Neacy v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1912
  3. State ex rel. Witkowski v. GoraWisconsin Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Dougherty v. W. H. Shenners Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1928

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Robinson v. KingNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1974
  2. State Ex Rel. Froelich v. Montgomery County Board of ElectionsOhio Court of Appeals · 1979
  3. Opinion No., Texas Attorney General Reports2001
  4. Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion, Texas Attorney General Reports2001

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API